Recently read that roughly 100,000 were made homeless by the ravages of the fire on the mostly wooden housing stock, would be interested to know how a 17th Century city dealt with the issue.
Just a small follow-up; someone once mentioned to me that the Great Fire wasn't as accidental as once thought more planned. Is there any truth to this?
Are you interested in the whole city of London or only the City itself? Because the City of London is a smaller entity in the city.
BBC History says they settled in surrounding towns after a period of camping/vagrancy outside the city:
At least 65,000 people [some say 100,000+] had been made homeless by the Fire. At first they camped in the fields outside the walls, but within days had dispersed to surrounding villages or other parts of London. Rents soared in the unburnt area, but somehow accommodation was found for all who needed it. Much merchandise had been destroyed, and there was virtually no fire insurance, so many people were ruined, and some moved away permanently.
The period of rebuilding that followed came relatively rapidly, but people had to pay out of pocket to fully rebuild their homes and businesses. Government works were subsidized by an increase in the coal tax.
TL;DR: either they moved to other towns or stayed & paid to rebuild, with some camping outside the city in the days after.